Author Topic: Why were they all at the White House that night? Colin Caffell's alibi?  (Read 42255 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Caroline

Well I did and you are left with it may have happened.  There is nothing to prove it didn't.

Except the facts.

Offline Robittybob1

Except the facts.
"..... it may have happened.  There is nothing to prove it didn't."  I think it could have happened but at a different time.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Caroline

"..... it may have happened.  There is nothing to prove it didn't."  I think it could have happened but at a different time.

There is lots to prove it didn't happen.

Offline Robittybob1

There is lots to prove it didn't happen.
Like what?   Can you list some of the reasons if they spring to mind please?
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Caroline

Like what?   Can you list some of the reasons if they spring to mind please?

You n need to do some reading on the case and then come back.

Offline Robittybob1

You n need to do some reading on the case and then come back.
We are working on this together remember.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Caroline

We are working on this together remember.

That's certainly a possibility but without knowing much about the case you have come up with theories that can be immediately discounted. Just read one of the books (CAL's) and you'll see why or read the documents online.

Offline Robittybob1

That's certainly a possibility but without knowing much about the case you have come up with theories that can be immediately discounted. Just read one of the books (CAL's) and you'll see why or read the documents online.
Show me where the mini theory is discounted.  I promise you, if you show me a fault in it I'll move on.
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Offline Caroline

Show me where the mini theory is discounted.  I promise you, if you show me a fault in it I'll move on.

I have answered this on another thread - you ignored it.

Offline Robittybob1

I have answered this on another thread - you ignored it.
I must have missed.  I have found it again looking through "Your Posts" http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11504.msg592786#msg592786

"Because Neville he was still working in the field, bringing in the last trailer of rape seed.

June was talking to her sister at that time

Bamber was on the phone to Julie

You scenario still has Bamber being a liar - but it didn't happen so ....."


So you reckon Neville Bamber was still working at 10:00 PM  the night before the murders.    That might be so, but all I'm trying to establish is how early the trouble started that night. 
Moderation
John has instructed all moderators to take a very strong line with posters who constantly breach the rules of this forum.  This sniping, goading, name calling and other various forms of disruption will cease.

Brancher

  • Guest
Not that I necessarily condone this thread and its speculation, but I'm going to try and assist the OP by clarifying what I think he (or she?) is driving at.

I think what is being said here can be reduced to this:

(i). If we adopt the hypothetical that Sheila did this, there is a further possibility that Sheila had assistance that Nevill did not surmise or detect before he made the call to Jeremy.

(ii). This assistance could have come from Jeremy of course, but what's being suggested is the possibility it came from a third party instead of (or maybe even in addition to) Jeremy.

(iii). One avenue (among many) this leads us to explore is to ask who else Sheila had associations with. 

(iv). To be honest, Colin Caffell is not the first person that springs to mind, for a number of reasons.  He has to be the most unlikely suspect.  I'd suspect Crispy of wrong-doing before him. 

But let's ask the question anyway:

Does Colin Caffell have a solid alibi for that night?  If he does, then unless he had astonishing powers of suggestion, he has to be excluded.

On the other hand, if he has no alibi, then this does not imply he had anything to do with it, but it may be fair to ask what was he doing that night.

My understanding is that the police never made inquiries of him.  No doubt this is partly because they found him at his house in London, and (I assume) his then-girlfriend will verify that he was there that night, if she was living with him.

Another, more neutral, way of posing the question would be this:

1. If we assume a hypothetical in which Sheila did this, do we also accept that Sheila had to have acted alone or did she need assistance?

2. If she needed assistance, are we saying it had to be Jeremy (so Jeremy is guilty anyway)? 

3. If we are excluding Jeremy, then who else is in the picture?

I hope that captures it.  Again, I don't condone this line of speculation necessarily.  Please don't attack the messenger, I'm just assisting the OP by trying to bring clarity to things and set out some parameters.

Offline Caroline

Not that I necessarily condone this thread and its speculation, but I'm going to try and assist the OP by clarifying what I think he (or she?) is driving at.

I think what is being said here can be reduced to this:

(i). If we adopt the hypothetical that Sheila did this, there is a further possibility that Sheila had assistance that Nevill did not surmise or detect before he made the call to Jeremy.

(ii). This assistance could have come from Jeremy of course, but what's being suggested is the possibility it came from a third party instead of (or maybe even in addition to) Jeremy.

(iii). One avenue (among many) this leads us to explore is to ask who else Sheila had associations with. 

(iv). To be honest, Colin Caffell is not the first person that springs to mind, for a number of reasons.  He has to be the most unlikely suspect.  I'd suspect Crispy of wrong-doing before him. 

But let's ask the question anyway:

Does Colin Caffell have a solid alibi for that night?  If he does, then unless he had astonishing powers of suggestion, he has to be excluded.

On the other hand, if he has no alibi, then this does not imply he had anything to do with it, but it may be fair to ask what was he doing that night.

My understanding is that the police never made inquiries of him.  No doubt this is partly because they found him at his house in London, and (I assume) his then-girlfriend will verify that he was there that night, if she was living with him.

Another, more neutral, way of posing the question would be this:

1. If we assume a hypothetical in which Sheila did this, do we also accept that Sheila had to have acted alone or did she need assistance?

2. If she needed assistance, are we saying it had to be Jeremy (so Jeremy is guilty anyway)? 

3. If we are excluding Jeremy, then who else is in the picture?

I hope that captures it.  Again, I don't condone this line of speculation necessarily.  Please don't attack the messenger, I'm just assisting the OP by trying to bring clarity to things and set out some parameters.

Colin is named in the title of the thread so the assertion is that it could have been him. Yes, he has a solid alibi and he was never a suspect - and rightly so.

I wouldn't be excluding Jeremy

And no shooting at you from me!  8((()*/

Offline APRIL

Not that I necessarily condone this thread and its speculation, but I'm going to try and assist the OP by clarifying what I think he (or she?) is driving at.

I think what is being said here can be reduced to this:

(i). If we adopt the hypothetical that Sheila did this, there is a further possibility that Sheila had assistance that Nevill did not surmise or detect before he made the call to Jeremy.

(ii). This assistance could have come from Jeremy of course, but what's being suggested is the possibility it came from a third party instead of (or maybe even in addition to) Jeremy.

(iii). One avenue (among many) this leads us to explore is to ask who else Sheila had associations with. 

(iv). To be honest, Colin Caffell is not the first person that springs to mind, for a number of reasons.  He has to be the most unlikely suspect.  I'd suspect Crispy of wrong-doing before him. 

But let's ask the question anyway:

Does Colin Caffell have a solid alibi for that night?  If he does, then unless he had astonishing powers of suggestion, he has to be excluded.

On the other hand, if he has no alibi, then this does not imply he had anything to do with it, but it may be fair to ask what was he doing that night.

My understanding is that the police never made inquiries of him.  No doubt this is partly because they found him at his house in London, and (I assume) his then-girlfriend will verify that he was there that night, if she was living with him.

Another, more neutral, way of posing the question would be this:

1. If we assume a hypothetical in which Sheila did this, do we also accept that Sheila had to have acted alone or did she need assistance?

2. If she needed assistance, are we saying it had to be Jeremy (so Jeremy is guilty anyway)? 

3. If we are excluding Jeremy, then who else is in the picture?

I hope that captures it.  Again, I don't condone this line of speculation necessarily.  Please don't attack the messenger, I'm just assisting the OP by trying to bring clarity to things and set out some parameters.


There's a glaringly obvious question you've omitted. In your scenario, Sheila appears to be organized and in command of her actions. Jeremy's entire synopsis is based on Sheila having a psychotic episode which he goes on to expound,at length, to the police.

Offline ISpyWithMyEye

That's kind, thank you, but I feel slightly ashamed of myself for not completely taking to him, given that he has been horribly victimised here.  He's a man who, in every facet of his being, cries out to be liked, but I can't like him.  Is there something wrong with me or have my spidey-senses picked up something off-key about him?  I tend to be right in my 'gut' judgement about people, for reasons I won't go into. 

But he's not a fundamentally bad man, let alone a murderer, I'm convinced of that.  Indeed, the very question is surely superfluous.


What do you mean by Colin “cries out to be liked”?

Where/how often have you seen him “crying out to be liked”?

« Last Edit: May 24, 2020, 10:44:36 AM by G-Unit »
Seeking Justice for June & Nevill Bamber, Sheila Caffell & her two six-year-old twin boys who were shot dead in their heads by Psychopath, JEREMY BAMBER who must NEVER be released.

Offline ISpyWithMyEye

We are working on this together remember.

As Caroline suggested, Robbitybob, it’s best you read up on the case first.

You’ll have some knowledge on it then and won’t need to ask questions on things that were established 35 years ago, such as: was Colin involved?

No. He definitely was not. It’s been substantiated 100% — and he was never a suspect. It’s akin to asking if the Pope was involved...Colin was in London when Jeremy killed his sons and family; he was with his girlfriend at home; he had no motive to kill his own sons, Sheila, or June and Nevill, and he wasn’t/is a psychopath. Nor was he greedy for money.

Quite frankly, the suggestion is bizarre...but you don’t know about the case


Try to read up on it, you’ll learn all the background then 😊
Seeking Justice for June & Nevill Bamber, Sheila Caffell & her two six-year-old twin boys who were shot dead in their heads by Psychopath, JEREMY BAMBER who must NEVER be released.